On 18/03/2012 22:21, Stef Verlinden wrote: > > Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPhone > > Op 18 mrt. 2012 om 15:15 heeft Thomas Beale<thomas.beale at > oceaninformatics.com> het volgende geschreven: > >> I still think Quantities should be computable as such - if we don't know how >> many mcg of substance 3 puffs is, we can't compute with it. > Although i tend to agree with you, this won't work because then you assume > that we're talking about the absolute truth. The absolute truth only exist > when you're talking, for instance, about astronomics. In medicine you can't > say 25 ml of alcohol is lethal. You can only say something like: 25 ml of > alcohol is lethal in an adult man of 80 kg. And only when he doesn't drink > more than 15 unit alcohol ? week. When he drinks more then The lethal dose is > higher. For ? roman of the same weight who drinks< 15 units ? week, the > lethal dose is lower. > > My point is that an absolute quantity alone doesn't meander much. At The > other hand, we know empirically that if someone has smoked 15 pack years he's > at serious risk. > > Then about puffs. I' m almost sure that you can translate ? puff info a > volume. If i remember it correctly 40 drops is 1 ml. So the same should go > for puffs.
ok but you are still talking about making it computable somehow - by assuming 1ml = 40 drops or whatever. If we want a kind of quantity that accommodates only representation in non-systematic units, we should not mix this type up with a proper Quantity that can be used with 90% (or maybe its only 75%) of all clinical data. - thomas > * > * > * > * > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20120319/a33f3164/attachment.html>
